 |
truthaction.org
9/11 TRUTH NOW
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pavlovian Dogcatcher
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 216
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 6:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Jon Gold wrote: | | ...statements like "This movement does not have room for those who do not 'believe' in Controlled Demolition" are suddenly acceptable? |
While I think there is room for you either way, it would be nice if you could put the effort into coming to terms with the fact that the buildings were brought down though some forms of controlled demolition. Granted, a rather wild form in the case of the towers, but the scale of the destruction without explosives is quite simply physically impossible, and the fall of WTC7 required some yet to be identified force(s) too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 1102
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pavlovian Dogcatcher wrote: | | Jon Gold wrote: | | ...statements like "This movement does not have room for those who do not 'believe' in Controlled Demolition" are suddenly acceptable? |
While I think there is room for you either way, it would be nice if you could put the effort into coming to terms with the fact that the buildings were brought down though some forms of controlled demolition. Granted, a rather wild form in the case of the towers, but the scale of the destruction without explosives is quite simply physically impossible, and the fall of WTC7 required some yet to be identified force(s) too. |
It's not a prerequisite. It would be nice if the movement came to terms with the fact that focusing solely on Controlled Demolition, when the masses have been saturated with hit pieces, documentaries, and media pundits saying how crazy the idea is, is not the best course of action in my opinion. It is STILL the #1 roadblock I come across with people. "You're one of those nuts who think there were explosives in the buildings." Just happened to me yesterday.
Here's the exact quote, "The difference is you think the U.S government brought down the Twin Towers. And that's when you leave to head for lala land."
I didn't even mention the towers.
You shouldn't have to be a scholar to understand the need for 9/11 Truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
victronix01
Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 1704
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jon, rather than trying to turn people away from talking about demolition to newbies, why not focus on what you think they should say. To me, the movement seems to be growing right now because of the scientists, engineers, etc who are behind demolition and have risked or lost their careers to do so.
For every person that says "la, la, la" on demolition, there appear to be just as many who will listen because they get fascinated, and will listen because there are now many professionals associated with the info. Richard's polls that he does for every talk shows his effort works.
Has anyone else done that simple kind of analysis to see what really does work in talking to people on the street? That would be helpful, rather than various people debating it via opinion on forums. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 1102
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| victronix01 wrote: | Jon, rather than trying to turn people away from talking about demolition to newbies, why not focus on what you think they should say. To me, the movement seems to be growing right now because of the scientists, engineers, etc who are behind demolition and have risked or lost their careers to do so.
For every person that says "la, la, la" on demolition, there appear to be just as many who will listen because they get fascinated, and will listen because there are now many professionals associated with the info. Richard's polls that he does for every talk shows his effort works.
Has anyone else done that simple kind of analysis to see what really does work in talking to people on the street? That would be helpful, rather than various people debating it via opinion on forums. |
I do Victoria, and I get called LIHOP for it. LIHOP doesn't mean "let it happen on purpose." LIHOP means anything that isn't controlled demolition. You know... NORAD's failed response, the warnings, the whistleblowers, the people who were rewarded and promoted for failure, the families, the responders, the ridiculous 9/11 Commission, the "Post-9/11 World" being a detriment to humanity. LIHOP.
And I don't think the movement is growing. In fact, I think the numbers are declining for people willing to be active for this cause. I think people are frustrated just like I am, and probably for the same reasons. You say that "because of the scientists, engineers, etc who are behind demolition and have risked or lost their careers to do so" the movement is growing, and yet, that is STILL the #1 pushback I get from people.
Let me ask you two simple questions Victoria... which outlet do the majority of Americans get their information from, and how has that outlet portrayed people like us? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zombie bill hicks
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 411
Location: West Virginia
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe its something of a perception issue. If we have mounds and mounds of evidence yet we only bullhorn about WTC 7 the perception is that the only thing the 9/11 truth movement is about is CD.
Since it sounds so out there on its face, many people are immediately turned off and look no further into the issue, believing that those people with signs and bullhorns on the corner are just nutters who need to get jobs.
Ive seen it happen, its been documented on forums, websites and videos. How does the movement combat the perception that the only thing we care about is proving that 3 buildings were demolished in broad daylight? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 1102
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zombie bill hicks wrote: | I believe its something of a perception issue. If we have mounds and mounds of evidence yet we only bullhorn about WTC 7 the perception is that the only thing the 9/11 truth movement is about is CD.
Since it sounds so out there on its face, many people are immediately turned off and look no further into the issue, believing that those people with signs and bullhorns on the corner are just nutters who need to get jobs.
Ive seen it happen, its been documented on forums, websites and videos. How does the movement combat the perception that the only thing we care about is proving that 3 buildings were demolished in broad daylight? |
By getting back to basics. As "the turning point" statement says, "while there are those who can follow the existing trail of evidence down the rabbit hole, our target demographic – a preoccupied American public – cannot. Our message must be re-calibrated to begin at the start with the most fundamental discrepancies and omissions in the 9/11 Commission Report in order to begin to chip away at the stone." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
victronix01
Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 1704
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | If we have mounds and mounds of evidence yet we only bullhorn about WTC 7 the perception is that the only thing the 9/11 truth movement is about is CD. Since it sounds so out there on its face, many people are immediately turned off and look no further into the issue |
Where is your evidence for this as a blanket statement?
There are different ways to appeal to different people. For me, B7 was what got me into the movement to begin with. Same with Steven Jones and Niels Harrit. Others are different.
The point is not that "demolition is wrong" to bring people in, but that we need a balance of information.
Instead of trying to demonize demolition, why not just focus on making a good set of info that isn't demolition that you would recommend?
And bullhorning about anything may not be right way to go in any case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
victronix01
Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 1704
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I do Victoria, and I get called LIHOP for it. |
By the hoax advocates on blogger. Sure, and I get slammed as supporting the official story on FL 77. Does that make me stop doing the work I believe in?
Just ignore it.
| Quote: | | And I don't think the movement is growing. In fact, I think the numbers are declining for people willing to be active for this cause. |
I like to work with facts -- I'm not sure we have them on this. 80,000 signatures in NYC is not nothing.
For some perspective, the Green Party in California has lost something like 40% of it's participation since Obama went into office. This is what always happens to progressive causes when the Dem savior is elected. There's nothing unusual about it. People go into a state of denial when they feel they can relax a little, and everyone is far worse off for it. Likely this is an across the board effect for many left of center or progressive causes at the moment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 1102
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| victronix01 wrote: | By the hoax advocates on blogger. Sure, and I get slammed as supporting the official story on FL 77. Does that make me stop doing the work I believe in?
Just ignore it. |
It shouldn't be ignored. It shouldn't be tolerated, and it should be denounced by anyone who sees people take part in it. I just confronted Dr. Griffin on the LIHOP/MIHOP terms the other day.
| victronix01 wrote: | I like to work with facts -- I'm not sure we have them on this. 80,000 signatures in NYC is not nothing.
For some perspective, the Green Party in California has lost something like 40% of it's participation since Obama went into office. This is what always happens to progressive causes when the Dem savior is elected. There's nothing unusual about it. People go into a state of denial when they feel they can relax a little, and everyone is far worse off for it. Likely this is an across the board effect for many left of center or progressive causes at the moment. |
How many people came to the NYC CAN march? 100-150? How many people live in New York City? 9 Million?
On 9/11/2006, we had what I would suspect is 5,000 people. This past anniversary, there was 100-200...
I see less and less people taking part in the eleventh of every month action. I see less and less "veterans" of this movement taking part in the cause. I don't think I'm wrong. I KNOW people are frustrated. I hear it all the time from people.
I noticed you didn't answer my question. I'll answer it for you. The Television is the outlet where most people get their information. The Television has portrayed us as crazy with Controlled Demolition and the Pentagon FOR YEARS.
What is "best" for the movement might just be tabling those things, and getting back to basics. That won't be a popular opinion, and I will probably be hated for even suggesting it, but I care about this cause, and I want it to succeed, and I don't think if we continue helping the Television appear accurate in its assessment of us will that happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zombie bill hicks
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 411
Location: West Virginia
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| victronix01 wrote: | | Quote: | | If we have mounds and mounds of evidence yet we only bullhorn about WTC 7 the perception is that the only thing the 9/11 truth movement is about is CD. Since it sounds so out there on its face, many people are immediately turned off and look no further into the issue |
The point is not that "demolition is wrong" to bring people in, but that we need a balance of information.
Instead of trying to demonize demolition, why not just focus on making a good set of info that isn't demolition that you would recommend?
And bullhorning about anything may not be right way to go in any case. |
Ok, be careful there, because I've never spoken out against CD or said that I don't believe in it. Ever.
WTC 7 was in fact one of the things that piqued my interest. However, I've certainly had to re-assess the way I deal with the public, because I've seen and found that Alex Jones style of clubbing you over the head w/ info (accurate or not) has done little to advance my cause.
EDIT:
You said:
| Quote: | | The point is not that "demolition is wrong" to bring people in, but that we need a balance of information. |
That's exactly the point Im trying to make. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 1102
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think there should be a method by which we approach people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pavlovian Dogcatcher
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 216
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jon Gold wrote: |
It would be nice if the movement came to terms with the fact that focusing solely on Controlled Demolition, when the masses have been saturated with hit pieces, documentaries, and media pundits saying how crazy the idea is...
|
So what? The falsers will call you crazy regardless of what you say to contradict the official conspiracy theory, and they'll do it for stuff you didn't even say, as you noted. Once you come to terms with facts which prove the official story patently false, then you can confront peoples' faith with the realities that contradict it, and all they can do is make hollow appeals to authority, as they can't prove the physically impossible anything but impossible. But as long as you are only making speculative arguments to support 9/11 truth, you can be dismissed as doing such, as you are just arguing one position of faith against another.
| Jon Gold wrote: |
You shouldn't have to be a scholar to understand the need for 9/11 Truth. |
You don't need anything but a high school level understanding of Newtonian physics to accept the fact that the official story in regard to the buildings coming down contradicts long understood and consistently demonstrable laws of physics. You really don't even need any formal understanding of the physics, particularly in the case of WTC7, just a reasonable grasp on reality.
What troubles me is that if we can't even get truthers to put the effort into coming to terms with the facts which prove the official conspiracy theory wrong, then we are a long way from ever convincing falsers to switch sides. The more people we have pointing out the facts, the less people will be prone to denying them, and that is the path to getting a real investigation.
Here is a good video describing the psychological phenomena we are dealing with, specifically in regard to WTC7:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5695875352844691386#
Last edited by Pavlovian Dogcatcher on Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zombie bill hicks
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 411
Location: West Virginia
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What are you talking about |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pavlovian Dogcatcher
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 216
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm talking about the truth, though I understand that many are averse to such. I edited my post a bit for clarity if that might help, being dyslexic, I'm not much of a proofreader though, and feel free to ask for questions on the specifics of my comments if you have issues with any of them.
By the way, did you know the great man in your avatar was working on an article about the demolition of the towers when we lost him? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zombie bill hicks
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 411
Location: West Virginia
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Source for that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
